It was not clear which tweets had resulted in the suspension. However, on Tuesday, after Mr. Affleck tweeted that the allegations against Mr. Weinstein “made him sick,” Ms. McGowan called him a liar, saying he had long been aware of what Mr. Weinstein had done.

rosemcgowan TWITTER HAS SUSPENDED ME. THERE ARE POWERFUL FORCES AT WORK. BE MY VOICE. #ROSEARMY

By suspending her, Twitter created evidence that confirms suspicions that there is a conspiracy of silence surrounding the people who enabled Harvey Weinstein. The evidence — suspending McGowan — can be interpreted in different ways. It might be that Twitter has neutral rules and would suspend anybody who attacks anybody as specifically and severely as Rose McGowan attacked Ben Affleck, but I think Twitter is foolish to take down Rose McGowan, when it lets President Trump take his shots.

We hold all accounts to the same Rules, and consider a number of factors when assessing whether Tweets violate our Rules

Among the considerations is "newsworthiness" and whether a Tweet is of public interest

This has long been internal policy and we'll soon update our public-facing rules to reflect it. We need to do better on this, and will

Twitter is committed to transparency and keeping people informed about what's happening in the world

We’ll continue to be guided by these fundamental principles

So, the same rules for everybody includes a rule with an exception: newsworthiness.

The system of facilitating and protecting Harvey Weinstein is newsworthy, and Rose McGowan has personal experience and passionate energy giving something important to those of us who read and comment on Twitter.

If you don't apply your exceptions in a neutral fashion, they're not exceptions. They're loopholes.

ADDED: Right now, Rose McGowan's Twitter is working for me. And — for balance — here's Ben Affleck's Twitter feed. The top post is:

I acted inappropriately toward Ms. Burton and I sincerely apologize

The above-linked NYT story does not mention "Ms. Burton."

You can get more background on Burton — Hilarie Burton — in this Daily Mail piece: "'I would also love to get an apology from Ben Affleck': Makeup artist now claims Batman star and Weinstein protégé 'grabbed my a**' at a Golden Globes party' in 2014/Makeup artist, Annamarie Tendler, claims Ben Affleck 'grabbed her a**' in 2014/Tendler said she was attending a Golden Globes party when incident happened/She demanded Affleck apologize for 'pressing his finger in her crack' on Twitter/Affleck recently apologized for groping Hilarie Burton on TRL in 2003/Burton tweeted about the incident in light of Weinstein sex abuse scandal/She wrote 'I didn't forget' on Twitter & said she was forced to 'laugh' off incident/Affleck, who is currently in rehab for alcohol addiction, admitted his 'inappropriate' behavior and apologized to the actress on Twitter/It came hours after Affleck said he was 'saddened and angry' over 'sickening claims' of sexual assault made against his benefactor Weinstein/He was slammed by many, specifically Rose McGowan, who called him a liar."

I warned everybody about Rose. She is Scots Irish, and like a female DaTrump, she will never surrender. And if we call her names such as "boisterous", or "bombastic", or "non-feminine, "she will take them as compliments.

From Rose McGowan's intent to expose part of Hollywood's underbelly, to the discussion of black culture and absolute destruction it's had/has on black youth (esp. the males), to exposing the world-wide jihad to terrorize non-Muslims, all of which is expressly exhorted in the Quran, to the showing of what happens in an actual abortion (particularly late-terms ones where parts are clearly recognized for what they are), and lots more, the left wants silence and submission.

Maybe I don't understand what Twitter's policy purports to be. Why is Trump the relevant example? He does attack people all the time, but isn't he attacked by others several orders of magnitude more often? Isn't that about 42 percent of Twitter right now, is personal attacks on Trump? What's the supposed rule here?

Looks like Twitter's policy is still fluid and that may cause more problems and more scrutiny. They are not acting in their own interests by getting in the way of the story. It would be better for them to allow comments but flag them or disavow them in their own outlet.

Back in the day, his buddy Kevin Smith had him play a character in "Mallrats", Shannon Hamilton, that was big on ass.

Gwen: Shannon Hamilton?T.S. Quint: You know that guy?Gwen: I went out with him once after we dated. He tried to screw me some place very uncomfortable.T.S. Quint: What? Like the back of a Volkswagen?Brodie: Sounds like his M.O.

There is an episode of South Park where a couple with a medical condition are looking for their long lost child. The child turns out to be Ben Affleck. The medical condition? They have buttocks for heads.

Rose McGowan has now achieved a certain amount of name recognition. It will be interesting to see if some Hollywood producer decides to cash in on that recognition and cast her as a crusading DA or some such part. My best guess is that her career is over and that Ben Affleck will continue to star in major motion pictures. Rose McGowan is Exhibit A in the case she's making against Hollywood.

Twitter suspends or kills off accounts I follow regularly--I don't follow a lot but I keep my follow count at an even number as that's the only way you can tell when one goes down!The accounts I follow tend to be rightwing, libertarian, or neoreationary focused, and apparently all it takes to get a suspension is enough reports within a short period of time.

So, you know, "the system" is rigged against people who oppose the Left. If it takes Twitter mistreating an actress who happens to be attacking some big name Hollywood stars (who happen to be strongly Left themselves) to make people understand that, so be it.

Interesting that Twitter gets away with censorship with nary a whimper from the sjw crowd.. They censored Marsha Blackburn's campaign opening statement because she said something disparaging (but true) about Planned Parenthood. Dan Henninger has some interesting things to say about the "Free Speech Wars" in todays WSJ. Link.

Excerpt:"Attorney General Jeff Sessions recently announced in a speech at the Georgetown University Law School that the Justice Department will start intervening on the side of plaintiffs in campus free-speech cases.The department has filed its first “statement of interest,” essentially an amicus brief, in a free-speech lawsuit brought against Georgia Gwinnett College, which has created free-speech zones, or “public forum areas,” requiring a college-approved reservation."

The first thing that made me believe Rose McGowan had been sexually assaulted was the stark contrast in the way she presents herself. She used to dress and do her hair in a very feminine style. Not overtly sex, just all-woman. The shaved head and the change in dress portray someone who is trying to hide her womanhood, something victims of sexual assault often do. Whatever else her coming forward accomplishes, I hope it helps her heal. Taking sides in this only makes Twitter look bad. It does nothing to help Weinstein.

She's 44, her career is over, unless at this late stage she can make the transition into becoming a "serious" actress -- in which case her career will be severely diminished. Actresses have a small window for achieving success: late teens to late thirties. And their stock starts declining when they turn thirty.

It's a terrible business for women especially, but really for everyone. It is inhabited by the worst sort of people and it inevitably brings out the worst in good people. You're either one of the scumbags or you're an enabler of the scumbags, merely by taking part in the business and keeping silent when you witness -- as you inevitably will, frequently -- the scumbags behaving like the scum they are. I said in one of yesterday's threads that the entertainment business in general and the movie business in particular were depthless sinkholes of depravity. They are, and I speak from direct experience. You all really have no idea. The Weinstein revelations are tame stuff compared to what goes on, day in and day out.

Why is Twitter Rose McGowan's only platform? She's newsworthy. Why isn't she being interviewed by the Today show or being booked by the late night comics? .....I don't know that much about her. Apparently she used to be Marilyn Manson's girlfriend. It's easy to marginalize such a person as flaky and unreliable. But that's just the kind of person to raise a stink......The fact that she's saying these things on Twitter on not on the Jimmy Kimmel Show is further proof of how currupt they all are.

I suspect Harvey is being thrown to the wolves in hopes that they will be sated and go away. There are much more serious stories in Hollywood. The people implicated in those will eagerly toss Harvey off a building to save themselves.

And can someone please make a Transformers 9 with just visuals for the global market and Meryl Streep in it while a host of Slate writers drool over her performance?

From politics and political parties to media to Hollywood a lot of American models are undergoing rapid transformation. It’s not clear the results will be better and/or more stable, at least, from where I stand:

Remember the Debbie Reynolds character played by Shirley McLaine in Postcards from the Edge? She hosted a party for all the beautiful people, during which she sang a song about how she might be old, but she was still here--meaning she was still in Hollywood and could still throw a party like that.

If one is addicted to the fame, the atmosphere, the adulation, then one can overlook a lot. But for whatever reason, Rose McGowan ain't still there. She's not getting hit on by producers now. She still has fans, though, and if her career is over, why not take the shots? It might feel good to get a few of your own in on guys like Affleck and Weinstein. Twitter lets her do that, directly and cost free.

I am a little surprised ( well not really ) that she is attacking the "golden boys". If I am not mistaken many women lookednthe other way and it was mostly women pimping them out. An actual much more disgusting role.

Rose directed her followers to attack another twitter user. People get banned for that action. She was suspended. Special treatment. BTW the victim was on her side of justice; she's just too manic to see it.

Google is now essentially the in-house IT shop for the Democratic machine in all its forms. McGowan could possibly start an avalanche of disclosures out of Hollywood & that could jeopardize relationships carefully cultivated between the Dems & Hollywood players for years. Hollywood is a big source of money for the Dems.

Oh, & by the way, you remember the IT security company Crowdstrike which handled the investigation on the DNC email server in lieu of the FBI. They claimed the server was hacked by the Russkies, but never offered public proof. Guess who's one of their major funders?

In July 2015, Google invested in the company's Series C funding round, which in total raised $100 million.

Al Gore sites on the board of Google. He got incredibly rich from them, built up many times the wealth his dear old pappy got for being Armand Hammer's bought and paid for Senator from Tennessee. Did you know that Al's middle name is 'A' that it doesn't stand for anything? Not even Armand? Nope, nuthin'!

Twitter says she was suspended for posting a private phone number. She should have been. Wasn’t Althouse upset when CNN doxxed someone?

This woman is beginning to sound like Abigail Williams to me. As Althouse put it, on fire. That is, an escalating series of charges against a widening circle of people, imprecations, and promises of more to come. Doesn’t that set off any alarms?